Education As an Instrument of Moldovan Identity Formation*

Education as an Instrument of Moldovan * Identity Formation Steven D. ROPER More than a decade after the transition to democracy in east Europe, the term ‘post-communism’ has lost much of its relevancy as countries have become integrated into European institutions and as a new generation of citizens assume leadership positions without experience or identity in a communist system. Charles King argues that we are in a ‘post-post-communist’ stage in which the communist legacy is no longer a defining characteristic of the transition to democracy or the policies of former communist countries.1 Indeed, our geographic understanding of Europe has fundamental changed since 1989. The terms ‘eastern’ and ‘western’ Europe once served to distinguish geographical and importantly ideological points of reference. Today, the division between east and west Europe has been transformed by competing agendas and cultural processes into one that distinguishes between ‘north’ and ‘south’ Europe. For example, countries such as Romania identify themselves as southeastern European not Balkan and not part of the Black Sea region. The term ‘Eurasian’ has been used to describe the countries of the former Soviet Union ranging from Ukraine to Kazakhstan.2 Just as the * An earlier version of this research was presented at the conference ‘Reconstruction and Interaction of Slavic Eurasia and Its Neighboring Worlds’, Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, 8–10 December 2004. I want to thank MATSUZATO Kimitaka, MUTSUSHIKA Sigeo and Charles King for their comments and advice. I also want to thank IEDA Osamu for his support and kind invitation to participate at the conference. Finally, I want to thank the US Air War College for its support for this project while I was a Visiting Associate Professor. The opinions, conclusions and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the US Air Force, the Department of Defense or any other US government agency. 1 Charles King, ‘Post-Postcommunism: Transition, Comparison, and the End of “Eastern Europe”’, World Politics 53 (2000), pp. 143–172, at p. 150. 2 Ieda argues that within the ‘mega-area’ of Eurasia exists several ‘meso-areas’ that define various regions or sub-regions based on institutional identity. IEDA Osamu, ‘Regional - 183 - STEVEN D. ROPER academic community has struggled with developing appropriate terminology to describe these countries and regions, some of the countries have also struggled with defining their identity and geography. In the case of Ukraine, there is a distinctive regional character that divides the country not only geographically but also ideologically and culturally. In the case of Moldova, the nature of identity is also understood in terms of regions (e.g. Transnistria and Gagauzia). In the last decade, there has been a search for the meaning of Moldovan identity which has led to political conflict and ultimately civil war. Moldova geographically and culturally is situated between Europe and Eurasia, and this location has made the development of a cohesive Moldovan identity problematic. The 1992 civil war and the de facto state status of Transnistria demonstrate the difficulty that Moldovans have had in coming to terms with their identity. One of the important agents of identity formation and socialisation is education. There is a large political science literature that examines the impact that education has on group identity formation as well as on the process of individual political socialisation. During the Soviet period, the education system in Moldova was used as a means to russify the indigenous titular population through the use of Russian-language as the principle means of instruction. Before 1940, the Romanian government used education as a means to promote Romanian-language and culture in the newly acquired region of Moldova.3 Therefore, education and the language of instruction has been a highly politicised issue in the country—education was used by Romanian and Soviet leaders to form group identity as well as support the regime. In the early 1990s, there were numerous education reforms implemented designed to support the use of the Moldovan language4 in order to promote a unique Moldovan identity. Identities and Meso-Mega Area Dynamics in Slavic Eurasia: Focused on Eastern Europe’, in MATSUZATO Kimitaka (ed.), Emerging Meso-Areas in the Former Socialist Countries: Histories Revived or Improvised? (Sapporo, 2005), pp. 19–41, at p. 3. 3 Irina Livezeanu, Cultural Politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, Nation-Building, & Ethnic Struggle, 1918–1930 (Ithaca, 1995), p. 75. 4 The Moldovan constitution recognises Moldovan as the official state language. Moldovan is a dialect of Romanian. Language has been a continuous issue between Moldova and Romania since 1991. In the early 1990s, former president Mircea Snegur articulated a policy of ‘one people, two states’ predicated on a difference in language. - 184 - EDUCATION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF MOLDOVAN IDENTITY FORMATION Education and linguistic issues have remained important vehicles of identity formation in the country. However since 2001, education and language instruction have emerged as central political issues that have been used by various groups to define Moldovan identity in terms of Moldova’s regional space. While the ruling Communist Party of Moldova (PCM) has promoted the use of Russian-language and Moldovan integration within the CIS, opposition parties have promoted the use of the Moldovan-language 5 and Moldovan integration within European structures. Therefore, there are competing political notions of Moldovan identity that are expressed within the education system and by the use of language instruction. While there is an ongoing debate within the Moldovan capital, the debate between the Moldovan central government and the break-away region of Transnistria has been the primary focus of these competing visions of identity. In July 2004, Transnistrian authorities began to close Romanian-language6 secondary schools. These closures resulted in the destruction of school property and were denounced not only by the Moldovan leadership but also the international community as well. The OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, Rolf Ekeus, has correctly described the Transnistrian policy as ‘linguistic cleansing’.7 While there has been a great deal of focus on the events in Transnistria, these events need to be viewed within the larger context of how education and language instruction have been debated within the country. This paper focuses on the politicisation of education in Moldova, and how education curriculum and instruction are being used to create competing visions of Moldovan identity. The paper examines the influence of three specific education policies (e.g. Russian-language instruction, an integrated history course and Romanian-language school closures in Transnistria) on the debate concerning Moldovan identity and ultimately Moldovan statehood. The events in Transnistria demonstrate that education is not only an 5 Many in the opposition, particular within the Christian Democratic Popular Front, would refer to the language as Romanian. 6 The Transnistrian view is that the fundamental difference between the Moldovan-language and the Romanian-language is the script that is used. Therefore, the Transnistrians are not opposed to Moldovan, per se but more specifically to the use of the Latin alphabet. Therefore in this paper, I will refer to Romanian-language schools as those that teach using the Latin alphabet. 7 OSCE Press Release, 15 July 2004. - 185 - STEVEN D. ROPER important agent of identity formation, but also that such crude political tactics as school closures ultimately affect other education policies, reinforce negative stereotypes and make meaningful dialogue impossible. The larger issue that the school closures in Transnistria impact is whether now a devolution of authority on issues such as education policy is possible whether in a federal state or a state that grants broad autonomy. The Evolution of Moldovan Education Policy in the Early 1990s In order to understand the current debates within Moldovan education policy and how these policies influence identity formation, it is instructive to consider the important changes that occurred in state education policies following 1991. Like almost all of the former Soviet republics, Moldovan education instruction was largely conducted in the Russian-language, especially beyond primary school in the urban areas. For example in the capital of Chişinău, the polytechnic university treated Romanian as a foreign language, and only approximately 10 per cent of kindergarten students were educated using the Romanian-language. However, there were significant differences between the rural areas and the capital. In the last officially released census in 1989,8 40.9 per cent of students studied in Russian while 59.1 per cent studied in the titular language.9 The situation in secondary and university education changed dramatically once the pro-Romanian Popular Front commanded a majority in the parliament. The 1989 language law recognised Moldovan (using the Latin script) as the official state language, and the initial cabinet was composed almost exclusively of ethnic Moldovans. By the 1992–1993 academic year, 71 per cent of secondary school students were taught in the Moldovan-language. While the number of courses offered in Moldovan increased dramatically, the

Load more